Well we have to to disagree on this one. And it's like all my reasoning isn't acknowledged at all. Why do we not have slavery any longer? Why do we denounce it as a sin to have slaves? You never answered me on that one. I present point after point of sound reasoning, and it's not getting any recognition. We have a wholly different view on the place of divine law in a christian context, and how the church can alter it much like Jesus altered the sabbath laws and pointed out how they were for man and not man for the sabbath. So before we discuss that any further, please answer the specific points that I am making, without flat out denying my reasoning without understanding what I am actually writing about.

A lot of assumptions there Anti - Like we actually understand what you're saying all the time - which I don'tLike bringing up slavery? We denounce slavery as a sin because you can't truly love someone you own and we are all the same in christ, slave or free, rich or poor, greek or Jew, etc. We all have one master, Christ.I didn't answer you previously on slavery because then, and I still do, think you really aren't serious. You lump together, jewish ritual, eating laws, cleansing laws, personal instructions,and the ten commandmandments all in one. How could you be serious?By the way, it doesn't matter, but Jesus didn't change the sabbath, the church did.You also say that church can alter divine law? Since when? and who gave them authority over God?

Logged

"Why do so many people think that the Bible is only inspired at certain points - and that THEY are inspired to pick out which points?"

Well we have to to disagree on this one. And it's like all my reasoning isn't acknowledged at all. Why do we not have slavery any longer? Why do we denounce it as a sin to have slaves? You never answered me on that one. I present point after point of sound reasoning, and it's not getting any recognition. We have a wholly different view on the place of divine law in a christian context, and how the church can alter it much like Jesus altered the sabbath laws and pointed out how they were for man and not man for the sabbath. So before we discuss that any further, please answer the specific points that I am making, without flat out denying my reasoning without understanding what I am actually writing about.

anti,

Because the laws changed with Jesus Christ, now we are no longer under the old laws. I don't think slavery was a sin but now there is neither BOND nor free according to Paul. Today, slavery would be a sin just like killing a woman who is caught in adultery, which was what was law in the OT.

and slaves were told to serve their masters AS IF they were serving Christ and the new interpretations replace master with employer and slave with employee because back then that was more like what slavery was. Just as people would come over to America as INDENTURED SERVANTS, just a nice name for slave and after 7 years they were free to go. Indentured servitude was to pay off debts. They call it another name even now but If you have a mortgage and a car payment and numerous credit card bills, you are an indentured servant of sorts, in that you must work to pay off your financial obligations. It's better in that we have more choices in the matter but it's worse in that most of us aren't debt free in 7 years.

Logged

"Why do so many people think that the Bible is only inspired at certain points - and that THEY are inspired to pick out which points?"

The point everyone is missing here is that our modern cultural definition of slavery IS different. Is not the same possible for 'homosexual'? Keep in mind, I don't think the Bible is pro-gay, but playing the advocate here to keep the discussion focused on Scripture, rather than a bunch of 'I feel' statements.

Yes, the Jews did not beat their own slaves, but they did consider them to be property, even if they were supposed to let them go every 7 years. Today, we find the term 'slavery' to mean 'any ownership of another human being'. I don't think comparing the OT cultural definition of slavery to indentured servitude or to modern credit card debt is at all what Paul had in mind. But if that's what we're 're-contextualizing' the Bible to mean, then I guess we're all guilty of that sin.

By the same token, I've read many arguments that the cultural definition of 'homosexual', and specifically where Paul is using it in the NT, is the idea of someone who gives up on their monogamous existing relationship (in this case, a hetero one) and exchanges it for gay sex out of an 'excess of lust'. Buying a thrill, if you will. Real sexual immorality.

We could go back and forth on that argument all day and never get anywhere. Perhaps the thing to focus is not 'does the Bible condone homosexuality', but rather 'does the Bible condone gay marriage'? We all know that the Bible only condones sexual relationships inside the monogamous confines of a marriage. However, I haven't read any Scripture that ever defines any marriage as being between two men or two women. So that would be the objection you'd have to overcome. But let's not forget Galatians 3:28: There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Again, I still don't believe Scripture supports gay marriage or homosexual behavior - but if we're going to discuss its validity on a forum dedicated to Scripture, maybe we should be starting from that point!

Victorious, yes, your points make sense. Scripture doesn't give any example of supporting homosexuality. But neither is there any narrative where homosexuality is part of it and where it is denounced. There is only the mention of it in the law of Moses and the mention of it in the Epistles of Paul.

My mother's argument is, the bible is a product of ancient times and hence we cannot always apply it in our modern day, and it's true that the last book of the bible and us are 2000 years apart. And it would be about people being products of their time besides being "products of God", and we're not obliged to obey antiquated notions of morality.

There are so many customs we have changed over the centuries. As just another example, parents don't marry their children anymore, the people go and look for a partner on their own. But Paul seemed to consider it normal that a man could "marry his virgin" (his daughter, in the sense of giving it into marriage).

And as I mentioned in another post, the church has the authority to bind and to loose according to scripture. And practically speaking the churches on the world do that all the time, denying or respecting the Sabbath (as opposed to the Sunday), keeping nor not keeping dietary laws. allowing or forbidding female clergy, and so on.

Why should the issue of homosexuality, then, be another issue? I guess it depends what we aim for as christians. Do we want to build christian communities that function just like the ancient ones, believe the same things (in all things), act the same way, etc? Some christians do this, others do not, and I'm personally not at all sure what God's directive would be. But what I do think is that Jesus told us to heed the love commandments and that they are the real essential core of theology.

However we decide, I think I am sure that God loves the liberal as well as the conservative, and about some things everyone must make his own decision, like in other human matters. It's between the concerned person and God really. Maybe we got different churches with different teachings for a purpose, so that people wouldn't wander into spiritual solitude out of frustration and so that people with different spiritual leanings can find their own spiritual "home base".

Augustine made this statement: In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity. Perhaps we could say that the homosexuality issue is non-essential in our dealings with this subject. Because that's where I would draw the line, the church should never throw out homosexuals, even practicing ones, that would be dead wrong in my eyes.

I don't know if you noticed anti- but you seem to quote or take references from just about everything and everyone but the bible. I won't give you a long list of quotes from old and new testaments because you have made it clear that what people say is more important than the word of God. I will re-iterate. Just as if it was adultery - love the sinner, hate the sin.

« Last Edit: November 16, 2012, 09:39:50 PM by ded2daworld »

Logged

"Why do so many people think that the Bible is only inspired at certain points - and that THEY are inspired to pick out which points?"

Anti - what bothers you more, that some sinners are also homosexual?(as some sinners are also theives, murderers, etc)or that scripture is scripture, it's inspired by God, he means what he says, and what he says about it is clear?It would be nice to be able to justify whatever we want to do as God didn't REALLY mean that to apply to us today.For example, there are many "straight" christians that re-interpret scripture to make pre-marital, nonmarital or extramarital OKAY for them in their particular situation. The bible is just as clear on this and people will always try to "justify" what the bible clearly says is wrong - when it is something they want to do.Me, for example, the bible is clearly against overeating for any reason yet, I still find myself doing it on occaision.

You can not justify homosexuality. You can not justify slander.You can not justify Gluttony.

What gives you the right to call yourselves a Christian when you still actively engage in over eating .Do you think God is easily Mocked

What gives you the right to call yourselves a Christian when you still actively engage in watching cable news where everyone is slanderingeach other. Do you think God is easily Mocked

What gives you the right call yourselves a Christian when you still actively engage in Homosexuality .Do you think God is easily Mocked

What gives you the right to call yourselves a Christian when you stillactively engage in satisfying the desires of the flesh. Do you think God is easily Mocked

The answers to all these questions is Jesus Jesus is the answer to these question equally.Jesus alone can justify Every person on the face of the earth can only be justified by Jesus.Most believers know this.

But some still put the burden of Justification on the backs of homosexuals.

What gives you the right to call yourselves a Christian when you stillactively engage in asking people to justify them selves?Do you think God is easily Mocked

Daj - once again I failed to make myself understood. I'm sorry for that.I never ask or tell people that they should justify themselves.I know all will be justified in Christ and a person cannot justify themselves.I used the word justify wrongly. I should have said, people sin(myself included)and make excuses for their sin - and I'm not saying that is right either.

Jesus dying for me and saving me is the only thing that gives me the right to call myself a christian.-and there isn't a person alive that calls themself a christian that doesn't sin.God knows my heart, I'm not concerned at all that He will think I'm mocking Him.

Logged

"Why do so many people think that the Bible is only inspired at certain points - and that THEY are inspired to pick out which points?"

ded, I believe being scripturally accurate is a good thing, something to be encouraged. Scripturally accuarate, while looking to the Lord for Spirit revelation - "it is written", opened up to us by the Spirit. They work together.

And once again - disagreeing and "not understanding" can be 2 vastly different things.

This thread has been locked for just a bit. It could be re-opened, if it's obvious there's a benefit to doing so. It's under discussion.

IMO, the scriptures have been opened, examined, in a spirit of love, patience, and fellowship. It appears we have a direction of dischord, and dissension, and it needs to redirect into a more productive vein. Much is allowed here, but WITHIN the scriptures - not obviously arguing against them.

I've always liked this from a former administrator: "You're free to believe that Armageddon happened a few decades ago on television between Yosemite Sam and Bugs Bunny, although a couple of folks around here would snicker over your trying to be serious with that on the Book of Revelation board, particularly with charts, Bible code info, photos, video footage, and other proofs of the carnage, along with signed testimonies that Daffy Duck and Marvin Martian were the two witnesses that have since been raised from the dead."

That said, at some point, when something's been beaten to death, it can be time to change direction and discuss something else - UR related.

Anti - what bothers you more, that some sinners are also homosexual?(as some sinners are also theives, murderers, etc)or that scripture is scripture, it's inspired by God, he means what he says, and what he says about it is clear?It would be nice to be able to justify whatever we want to do as God didn't REALLY mean that to apply to us today.For example, there are many "straight" christians that re-interpret scripture to make pre-marital, nonmarital or extramarital OKAY for them in their particular situation. The bible is just as clear on this and people will always try to "justify" what the bible clearly says is wrong - when it is something they want to do.Me, for example, the bible is clearly against overeating for any reason yet, I still find myself doing it on occaision.

You can not justify homosexuality. You can not justify slander.You can not justify Gluttony.

What gives you the right to call yourselves a Christian when you still actively engage in over eating .Do you think God is easily Mocked

What gives you the right to call yourselves a Christian when you still actively engage in watching cable news where everyone is slanderingeach other. Do you think God is easily Mocked

What gives you the right call yourselves a Christian when you still actively engage in Homosexuality .Do you think God is easily Mocked

What gives you the right to call yourselves a Christian when you stillactively engage in satisfying the desires of the flesh. Do you think God is easily Mocked

The answers to all these questions is Jesus Jesus is the answer to these question equally.Jesus alone can justify Every person on the face of the earth can only be justified by Jesus.Most believers know this.

But some still put the burden of Justification on the backs of homosexuals.

What gives you the right to call yourselves a Christian when you stillactively engage in asking people to justify them selves?Do you think God is easily Mocked

God is not mocked, whatsoever a man sows, so shall he also reap. Those who sow to the flesh will reap corruption, those who sow to the spirit will receive life.

God is not mocked, some will recive few stripes, some will receive many stripes.

The only persons who will receive no stripes are those who have continued to confess there sins and sow to the spirit.

Adulterers who justify their adulterousness will receive stripes.

Fornicators who justify their lust will receive stripes.

Pharisees who judge, Liars who lie, all those who continue in iniquity while JUSTIFYING THEIR UNRIGHTEOUS ACTS will receive stripes- accordingly to the measure of the offences.

Forgivesness comes when we repent. This is not necessariliy when we get the victory. We may wrestle with a certain sins our whole life long, and we will be forgiven our whole life long IF.... we are open with God about our sins and stay in a state of "confession" and "remission" :o).

If we refuse to acknowledge that our sin is sin, then we may receive correction......

1 Jn 1:8 If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us.

1Jn 5:16 If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask and God will for him give life to those who commit sin not leading to death. There is a sin leading to death; I do not say that he should make request for this.

IMO- In all things we ought to pray for ourselves, one another and anyone who the Lord leads into our sphere of experience for deliverance from sin and remission of sins, homosexual or otherwise. This however does not mean that we do not acknowledge that homosexuality is sin, anymore that we refuse to acknowledge that heterosexual adultery and fornication are sins. Loving the sinner and praying for their deliverance and telling them how much God loves them is a part of the purpose of the ones who have experienced deliverance from sin- NOT AS JUDGES, but as friends and witnesses who have themselves, been forgiven and received unmerited favor in the form of blood washed, spirit quickened renewal and restoration. A new and living way, through the veil, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil consciousness.

Concerning Roman slavery, the status of as much as half the populace, Paul said if you get an opportunity to be free, take it. This was different than what translators call "slavery" under the Old Covenant Law. Not only were those in servitude released the 7th year, they were given enough land, seed, livestock and the like to be self-sufficient, providing for their families and able to develop their own business. If the family they were apprenticed to was willing and the "slave" agreed, he committed himself and whatever was his to serve his master. As a symbol of this relationship His ear was was pierced to a door by an awl and he wore a gold ring in it thereafter. This was being a "bond-slave," which is what Paul called himself in relation to Jesus his Master.

I have explained repeatedly, as have several others, that eating pork, Kosher law, is not the same as moral law. Christians for a couple thousand years have held mosaic ritual law does not apply to the Church. They also have upheld a continuity between Old and New Testament morality. While things like the death penalty for homosexual behavior was seen as politically relevant to Israelite law, not Church law. Even the period of a couple of hundred years when not only homosexuals, but those possessing the Bible in their own language were punished by death, it was the state, such as Spain, who performed the executions, not the Roman Catholic Church, though it was under their instigation. I refuse to accept any sectarian Institutional religion under the bureaucratic control of other men as the legitimate Church. This should be obvious to any unbiased observer. I certainly abhor the later abuses of the Inquisition as does any disciple of Jesus. To a large extent it was believing Him to torture myriads in the lake of fire that got them into such an evil mess.

To say what the Bible says about homosexuality being a sin is no longer relevant because we are now under the love laws forgets that both the prohibition of homosexuality and that we should love was written at the same time, both in Hebrew and Greek scripture. These are not incompatible.

One of the greatest harms of homosexuality is the loss of so many wonderful children that will never get to exist. We are to multiply and be fruitful. This is a hard sell in our day when the popular misconception that so much is to be blamed on over population has so transfixed the uninformed it is hard to persuade them otherwise. Population control is people control. Some looming problems in having enough water, for instance, are engineering challenges that need to be met, not by murdering millions, but finding how to release 33 times the water in all the oceans and rivers from selite (or, cellite?) a mineral 2 to 5 kilometers under the surface all over the world.

Not having a family not only tends to make men more mean spirited and self-centered, having that extra time means they infiltrate bureaucracies and perpetrate their own values. A couple of people that individually could support a family and instead spend it on themselves change the values of those around them. In a neighborhood where others of like kind have gathered, the property values go up and families can't afford to live there anymore. This is literal "gentrification" of a neighborhood. Those nearby raise their sale prices and so comes artificially inflated property values, and so on. There are traceable effects in a society that takes up openly flaunted homosexuality. This indecency coarsens the culture and is hand in hand with increased violence. Thirteen of the first fifteen Roman Emperors were homosexual and they weren't known for gentleness. More could be said.

A key to Romans chapter one is that it is a culture, not individuals Paul is discussing. "They, their, themselves, those," the plural is used over and over. It's not "a man," but, "men." It's not "that woman," but "their women." Our society was publicly heterosexual when I was growing up. Whatever was behind closed doors tended to stay behind closed doors. Now there is much homosexuality in the public eye. When it says, "the males, besides, leaving the natural use of the female" it is the change of course of a culture which is being pointed out. God lets a people fill up their cup of iniquity before he makes them drink His cup of wrath. Some rightly think God will judge us for such; but, the message is homosexuality itself is the judgement against a culture as it is going down for the count. "God gave them over!"

« Last Edit: November 17, 2012, 07:48:37 AM by reFORMer »

Logged

I went to church; but, the Church wasn't on the program! JESUS WANTS HIS BODY BACK!! MEET WITHOUT HUMAN HEADSHIP!!!